For moral relativists

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
off topic reply so I don't want this to derail the thread, but why would you want to have your life and the rules you live by defined by some people who lived 200 years ago?

[/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you were born into a society that is a certain way does not mean that it 'should' be that way, or that it is desirable.

The status quo is not 'correct' because it is the status quo.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your choices are to
A- Change your society
B- Find a society more to your liking
C- Live as a legal deviant, accepting the fact that you may face penalties if caught.
D- Live outside of society

[/ QUOTE ]

This is nothing more than a description of the status quo. It doesn't provide any sort of normative justificaiton for that state of affairs being the status quo.

[/ QUOTE ]
He asked "why would you want to have your life and the rules you live by defined by some people who lived 200 years ago?" I was just laying out the alternatives. Maybe I misunderstood his post. I took it as a question rather than an argument. If it was an argument then it would appear to be somewhat of a straw man attack.

[/ QUOTE ]

He said the status quo is not justified by virtue of being the status quo. You responded with a description of the status quo.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody is disputing what the status quo is. If someone makes a post suggesting that, for example, pot be decriminalized, do you respond by saying "but pot is illegal!!!" ?

[/ QUOTE ]
Decriminalizing pot would fall under category A. How did I imply that I'm opposed to changing the law?

[/ QUOTE ]

Decriminalizing pot is not the same as suggesting that pot be decriminalized.